Next Piece

[ntl]

Where do you get your next piece--where does the inspiration come from? I'm working on one now, still have a long way to go, but want to start thinking about the next piece which will be a --aah--umm--aah---?
I have a variety of art materials and the space, so I'm not "limited" to oils, but it's what keeps calling me. I think I might like to do something with oil bars or pastels, but have no idea what. And my competence / confidence if about nil...Likewise, watercolor. Maybe it's time to go back to crocheting...
Or maybe drawing, till I get a better perspective. But the book won't be here until next week or so.

 

[Artyczar]

Sometimes the last piece informs the next. Sometimes I get inspiration from looking around at a lot of art on the internet. Sometimes it's like you (here) where I want to use a new medium. Sometimes I may feel a little stuck and have to reach into my folder of old ideas and sketches. I recently took a little beginner acrylic class online, yet I haven't produced one acrylic painting. I just watched the teacher paint. It inspired some watercolors for me though because she was making landscapes.

 

[Enyaw]

My 2 cents: Experimentation leads to ideas. Don't be afraid to waste materials.

 

[Maybenartist]

I wish I knew, then I'd know where to look.

 

[snoball]

Unless it is a commission, I almost have to wait for an inspiration. Sometimes I get an idea from out of nowhere and sometimes I see something surfing the Internet and other times it is a suggestion I hear somewhere. Who knows. Unless I have the creative spark ( ) I can't just start painting.

 

[stlukesguild]

As Arty suggests, I often get ideas for another piece while working on the previous piece... especially as I spend such a long time on a single painting. Sometimes I get ideas with regard to the composition... sometimes I just think about a different color harmony. As my work always features the human figure I often get ideas from seeing photographs or paintings of the figure that resonate with me. I also look a lot online for background ideas: flowers, patterns, etc... The subject often evolves during the process of working... and frequently as a result of something I've been reading.

 

[ntl]

Arty: "Sometimes the last piece informs the next. Sometimes I get inspiration from looking around at a lot of art on the internet. Sometimes it's like you (here) where I want to use a new medium. Sometimes I may feel a little stuck and have to reach into my folder of old ideas and sketches. I recently took a little beginner acrylic class online, yet I haven't produced one acrylic painting. I just watched the teacher paint. It inspired some watercolors for me though because she was making landscapes."
Thanks, Arty, you have several usable ideas there. I haven't used the bars or pastels for a long time, but I have space now, I think, just need to gesso some cardboard. I need a larger surface for the bars. My box (not folder) of old ideas is just under the table, several old sketchbooks are at hand. My PBS channel has one artist or another every day and I've been watching when I can.

Wayne, that's good advice. That's possibly been a major obstacle for me--that and not wanting to make mistakes / produce junk...

MBA, I'm getting some ideas here, I hope you are too.

Snoball, thanks. I'm in good company!

Stlukesguild, thanks. Another part of my situation: my "good" paintings take a long time, too. I'm a slow painter, and it gets discouraging at times. I saw Wyland paint a huge moonlit beach scene a few days ago and had to laugh. He started and finished in 1/2 hour, and I'm working on a painting I started about 37 years ago, lol. I don't have 37 more years! I do read, and at times think I'd like to paint a scene that is described. But I finish the book, and the inspiration is forgotten. Maybe a notepad at hand would help.

Thanks, everyone.

 

[Enyaw]

Mistakes and junk are what help us as artist learn to overcome them .. no fear: you don't have to show anyone your flubs unless you want to.

 

[stlukesguild]

Quality over Quantity. Vermeer... who painted may a few more than 40 paintings in his life... is far more recognized than most of the other painters of the period who churned out paintings far more rapidly.

 

[Enyaw]

Van Gogh is rated higher than Vermeer in the top ten rating I read. Lernardo first, Van Gogh second, Vermeer was sixth. i do believe Van Gogh was quite prolific in terms of producing art.

 

[Enyaw]

When a reporter asked, "How did it feel to fail 1,000 times?" Edison replied, "I didn't fail1,000 times. The light bulb was an invention with 1,000 steps." "Great success is built on failure, frustration, even catastrophy."

 

[stlukesguild]

I don't know what serious critical text would place Van Gogh as the second greatest artist of all time. Indeed, I don't know of any serious critical text that would attempt the establish any sort of list of the "top ten" artists of all time. There are so many artists whose impact on the history of art is every bit as great or greater than Van Gogh: Michelangelo, Praxiteles, Giotto, Botticelli, Raphael, Titian, Monet, Picasso, Matisse, Rubens, Bernini, Brunelleschi, Caravaggio, Van Eyck, The Limbourg Brothers, Bizhad, Hokusai, Utamaro, Degas, Dürer, Veronese, Giorgione, Ingres, Rodin, Manet, Fra Angelico, Rembrandt, J.M.W. Turner, Velazquez, Delacroix, Goya, Boucher, and many more... including many anonymous artists from the ancient world, the middle ages, Asia, the Islamic world, Africa, the Americas, etc... How does one offer an objective ranking? Some of these artists were incredibly prolific (Picasso, Monet, Rembrandt, Rubens, etc...) Some produced a limited oeuvre of the highest quality (Ingres, Michelangelo, Vermeer, etc...) Some artists' oeuvres contain dozens... hundreds... even thousands of lesser works ("failures"). Picasso certainly comes to mind, but also Monet, Rubens, Goya, Turner, etc... Some artists' outputs seem without flaw: Michelangelo, Vermeer, Giorgione, Vermeer. In part, this is owed to different methods of working. Van Gogh, Monet, and Picasso worked rapidly, quickly completing a work, and then moving on to the next. Other artists are greater perfectionists, working and reworking each work of art so that we never see the effort or the "mistakes". Here we might think of Ingres, Vermeer, Velazquez, Michelangelo, among others. One might also consider how much time is involved in a work of art. A single sculpture by Michelangelo or Bernini, engraving by Dürer, or painting by Ingres or Botticelli might involve more time than dozens of paintings by Van Gogh, Monet, or Picasso. Quantity is no assurance of Quality.

 

[Artyczar]

I have to agree that quantity and quality have nothing to do with each other, or at least I'd like to think that how long it takes to produce your work isn't what makes it "quality." Shouldn't it just take as long as it takes? Some of the work can go quickly and some of it can take a really long time, as long as you're satisfied you have made something successful in the very end. Shouldn't that be what counts?

But I also agree that one needs to make mistakes in order to get there. I have a lot of things I wouldn't count as part of my "inventory" at the end of the day. They are "experiments." I'd rather call them that than "mistakes."

I also might show things here that I'm working out. Maybe they aren't done, or fully formed. I have to decide on things over time sometimes. There's a lot of problem solving in art. Lots of decisions, etc. --to leave things as they are or come back and make changes. Sometimes that is a fine line too. All that stuff is a huge part of making art that counts.